Uponnothing.co.uk

1 - Number One News Resource of Pakistan - The News - Jang Group

In the House of Commons on Monday, Blair rejected a suggestion that Britain was more at risk from terrorist attack because of its involvement in the Iraq war. “It is a form of terrorism aimed at our way of life, not at any particular government or policy,” he said. “If we retreated on one front, they would simply make us retreat on another, so the only way to deal with it is to stand up to it and defeat it.”

The ignorance of Blair is beyond contempt, but I will have a go anyway. Blair and Bush are ideological buddies, both spouting the same bullshit, throughout the empires of the UK and the US the elite have profiteered from a foreign policy of military and consequently economic domination. Iraq is just a continuation of the way of life that the elite wish to maintain, military force used to occupy and take over the economy of a country, once again it is te elite that reap the rewards, and their own populations that suffer any comeback.

But this is besides the point, the illegal war in Iraq has killed between 25,000-125,000 people, surely Blair is not ignorant enough actually believe that this has not led to the possibility that the attack may have direct links to the occupation of Iraq? The argument that ‘terrorists attacked our way of life before the Iraq invasion’ therefore the Iraq war can be discounted as a cause is ludicrous - the Iraq war is simply the latest installment of the UK/US terrorist occupations of other countries, the hatred within terrorists has been nurtured by numerous acts of state terror killing millions more than terrorists ever have, or could. It won’t be the last either, with Iran firmly on the agenda, and US forces relocating on mass to surround China - simply because China has been rude enough to develop a strong economy and might make the US lose a few dollars.

But of course, this isn’t terrorism, terrorism means people in dark skin who carry bombs up their jumpers, not the UK/US who are civilised nations, using civilised napalm bombs, cluster bombs, tanks, laser-guided airstrikes against media stations, power-plants, and water facilities. This is civilised, this is war, we only reserve the word ‘terror’ for anyone who has the nerve to fight back, remember Bush and Blair declared a war on terror, and traditional rules of conflict dictate that the other party does tend to join in during a war.

This is not condoning terrorism, this is simplying pointing out the hypocrisy of when we react to such events in London with how terrible such an attack is, and how it is completely unjustifiable etc, yet we have justified our own state terror at the cost of millions of lives for years.

We cannot condemn them without asking ourselves serious questions about the state terror that is employed by our government, something that is again being condoned by us if we refuse to face it. To condemn the actions of the suicide bombers is right, they have taken the lives of innocent people in London, many of whom were probably against the war in Iraq, and may well have been against Tony Blair and his crusade. Terrorists have to realise that resorting to bombings such as this is not going to achieve anything, they are simply killing innocent civilians and increasing hatred and violence in people - making them more likely to support the government in even harsher violence in repsonse.

Likewise, we have to apply the same horror and respect to the dead civilians in Iraq, as they too have suffered at the hands of terrorism, they to are not responsible for any actions against Britain, they too were in the wrong place at the wrong time. We should feel disgusted by the actions of the terrorist bombers, and we should feel equally disgusted at the terrorist actions of our own government. The methods may be different, but the results are the same, innocent people being killed, without justice or reason, and - unless we step back and question what is terrorism - without hope.